Why are "progressives" so all or nothing about this issue? - Elliot Page Discussion

[–] chilone (18041) 4 years ago

You are not.

reply

[–] Lord Rake (4498) 4 years ago

They do not like discussion about their beliefs; because their beliefs aren't based on facts. They want the argument settled instantly without comment and when you give into their demands they move the goal post to the extremes. You would not believe the gay marriage debate would lead to pushing hormone replacement therapy on 5 year olds, but it did.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

Gay marriage has nothing to do with this, don't be ridiculous.

reply

[–] Lord Rake (4498) 4 years ago

Well once the gay marriage issue was resolved the left jumped right on the trans in bathrooms and feeding kids hormone therapy. It's not ridiculous it's what happened.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

Marriage equality is not a mental illness. Marriage equality is a right and has no affect on anyone else - unlike people chopping their dicks off and competing against real women in sports. Sit down, you fool.

reply

[–] Lord Rake (4498) 4 years ago

They moved directly from that issue to the issues I mentioned previously. They went from abortion in rare cases and early on to abortion after birth, best not to give an inch with crazy people.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

You're absolutely right.

Milo Yiannopoulos even warned people that's exactly what would happen. They force-fed gay marriage onto society by bypassing legislation and mandating it via the Supreme Court (against the wishes of the broader public).

Directly after that they started moving on to trans acceptance, and then child transgenderism.

It's obvious to anyone paying attention to the slippery slope that legalizing pedophilia is next. People say "That's crazy!" but they're already promoting sexual experimentation among the youth and "sex work positivity" among young adults. Within the next ten years they will be trying to push for "child consent" laws.

People tend to forget that NAMBLA only went away in name. The organization still lives on as part of the LGBTQIA+ agenda.

reply

[–] Lord Rake (4498) 4 years ago

I didn't want to say that part about their pedo agenda but that is exactly where they go next. Gay marriage was the pebble holding the boulder back.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

Yep, there were even some Left-wing outlets talking about how pedos aren't monsters, just misunderstood.

It's also why they keep pushing the false and debunked narrative that people are just "born gay", because it's another gateway excuse that they can use for pedos. Their argument will be "Guys, they can't help it. They're just born that way. We have to accept them."

The science isn't on their side, but that won't stop them from trying to legalize it anyway.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

Mandating via the Supreme Court? They aren’t beholden to anyone, they have lifetime appointments and interpret the constitution as it exists. It wasn’t mob rule that upheld marriage equality, it was the constitution.

You use Milo as an example then, say NAMBLA is now a part of LGBTQIA+. The left and lgbt aren’t condoning pedophilia, but your boy Milo did lol

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

The left and lgbt aren’t condoning pedophilia, but your boy Milo did lol

WRONG:
https://www.salon.com/2015/10/27/the_pedophile_i_could_not_help_he_was_not_a_monster_or_a_molester_the_system_destroyed_him_anyway/

The Left even tried to justify that being a pedo is a sexual-orientation, and they were just born that way.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/self-confessed-paedophile-todd-nickerson-tells-critics-you-re-real-monsters-a6675946.html

Boy, doesn't that sound familiar?

Rainbow Reich promoting child drag culture:
https://www.allgaylong.com/blog/children-exploring-drag/

You were saying?

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

Three anecdotal articles, and one from a pedophile, really? That’s your evidence. How about polling data from self described liberals or democrats? Get real

Children doing drag is not pedophilia either. I’d say it’s equally disturbing as just regular child beauty pageants in general. Those you’d probably find a lot of overbearing mothers on both sides of the political spectrum. Also, if you listen to a lot of older drag queens and trans people you’d hear them say they dressed up early on as girls in secret on their own accord.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

Three anecdotal articles, and one from a pedophile, really? That’s your evidence. How about polling data from self described liberals or democrats? Get real

No true Scotsman fallacy.

Children doing drag is not pedophilia either.

It's called child grooming, it's a necessary step that many pedophilic predators use to prey on children.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

Not a fallacy at all, my argument counter to yours was that the majority on the left do not condone pedophilia. You provided anecdotal evidence. If I find one kiddie diddler than voted for Trump that doesn’t mean all Trump supporters are also pedophile supporters. Nothing that you provided shows the majority of self described liberals or democrats, people who we’d agree to be on the left, condone pedophilia.

You also have no evidence of the political affiliation of Todd Nickerson. Is Ben Shapiro automatically liberal because he writes an op Ed in The NY Times?

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

my argument counter to yours was that the majority on the left do not condone pedophilia.

Based on what?

Salon is a fairly recognized and large Left-wing Liberal Progressive outlet. It's not an anecdote when a prominent Left-wing outlet supports pedophilia.

It's the equivalent of Lifesite News or The Blaze supporting anti-abortion and then saying "Conservatives support sites that support pro-life/anti-abortion stances." Well, they wouldn't be wrong.

In fact, based on voting habits alone, it sounds like Democrats don't mind the degenerate drag culture taking a main stage in politics:
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2020/09/drag-queen-whooped-anti-gay-democrat-primary-election-landslide/

That speaks volumes to your response of "nuh uh", backed up by zero data and almost no visibly large Democrats, Liberals, or Progressives denouncing child grooming, pedophilia acceptance, and child drag culture.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

You have no evidence. None. Good day sir, you lose, you get nothing. Is Ben Shapiro a liberal for posting in The NY Times?

Dennis Haster was the longest running speaker of the House, who was found to have sexually abused his students. Which party was he again? Or how about Roy Moore. Nolan, Ralph Shortey, Howard Scott Heldreth. Here’s a few more:

Republican County Commissioner David Swartz pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 11 and was sentenced to 8 years in prison
Republican judge Mark Pazuhanich pleaded no contest to fondling a 10-year old girl and was sentenced to 10 years probation.
Republican anti-abortion activist Nicholas Morency pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor.
Republican legislator Edison Misla Aldarondo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping his daughter between the ages of 9 and 17.
Republican Mayor Philip Giordano is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing 8- and 10-year old girls.
Republican campaign consultant Tom Shortridge was sentenced to three years probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year old girl.
Republican Senator Strom Thurmond, a notable racist, had sex with a 15-year old black girl which produced a child.
Republican pastor Mike Hintz, whom George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile.
Republican legislator Peter Dibble pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl.
Republican Congressman Donald “Buz” Lukens was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail.
Republican fundraiser Richard A. Delgaudio was found guilty of child porn charges and paying two teenage girls to pose for sexual photos.
Republican activist Mark A. Grethen convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children.
Republican activist Randal David Ankeney pleaded guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child.
Republican Congressman Dan Crane had sex with a female minor working as a congressional page.
Republican activist and Christian Coalition leader Beverly Russell admitted to an incestuous relationship with his step daughter.
Republican congressman and anti-gay activist Robert Bauman was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.
Republican Committee Chairman Jeffrey Patti was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped.

By your logic, since Milo said it was okay for him to have sex with a pedophile and he’s a popular right wing figurehead. All right wingers condone pedophilia. Then all right wingers in Boston are cheering on the Catholic Church letting priests fuck kids. Which by the way, Catholics, they lean pretty right on a lot of political issues. The Church themselves absolutely condones pedophilia as they just move around the priests. So I could say the right loves pedophiles just as easy. But I have Catholic family members, that voted for Trump I know they don’t like pedophiles.

Face it, you’re making an argument that doesn’t hold up.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

You have no evidence. None.

Links from Left-wing outlets prove otherwise.

Voting habits from Democrats prove otherwise.

Is Ben Shapiro a liberal for posting in The NY Times?

Did Ben Shapiro condone child drag queens?

By your logic, since Milo said it was okay for him to have sex with a pedophile and he’s a popular right wing figurehead. All right wingers condone pedophilia.

Right wing websites and pundits denounced Milo, which hilariously enough was covered by a Left-wing outlet:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/milo-yiannopoulos-on-pedophilia-and-this-arbitrary_b_58ab52a5e4b029c1d1f88d77

This article sums up how both sides attacked Milo over the issue:
https://turtleboysports.com/milos-comments-on-pedophiles-has-exposed-both-the-right-and-left-of-being-hypocritical-frauds/

So, feel free to find a Right wing website that actually defended the comments.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

Republican activist Marty Glickman (a.k.a. “Republican Marty”), was taken into custody by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD.

Republican legislative aide Howard L. Brooks was charged with molesting a 12-year old boy and possession of child pornography.

Republican Senate candidate John Hathaway was accused of having sex with his 12-year old baby sitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media.

Republican preacher Stephen White, who demanded a return to traditional values, was sentenced to jail after offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.

Republican talk show host Jon Matthews pleaded guilty to exposing his genitals to an 11 year old girl.

Republican anti-gay activist Earl “Butch” Kimmerling was sentenced to 40 years in prison for molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.

Republican Party leader Paul Ingram pleaded guilty to six counts of raping his daughters and served 14 years in federal prison.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

That’s a lot of republicans I just listed that fucked children. But I’m not trying to say that the RNC is the pedophile party. You’re the one grasping at straw saying that three articles proves majority of liberals support pedophilia. But it does show that republicans love to vote for pedophiles

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

With Milo and all these examples, I’m not making the stupid argument you are, I’m using your dumb logic against you to show how stupid it is.

Everyone hates pedos. Even vicious inmates in prison hate pedophiles.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

That’s a lot of republicans I just listed that fucked children. But I’m not trying to say that the RNC is the pedophile party. You’re the one grasping at straw saying that three articles proves majority of liberals support pedophilia. But it does show that republicans love to vote for pedophiles

Two fallacies for the price of one.

First of all, what you've done is listed a bunch of false equivalences.

Republicans committing crimes =/= party endorsing child grooming.

The crimes Republicans committed were neither endorsed nor promoted by anyone on the Right.

Second, that's a non-sequitur and has nothing to do with the Left promoting degeneracy, child drag queens, and child grooming, such as this:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/07/style/self-care/drag-kids-desmond-the-amazing.html

https://shortyawards.com/11th/desmond_amazing

https://www.thecut.com/2018/02/desmond-is-amazing-fashion-week-gypsy-sport.html

https://www.outfrontmagazine.com/desmond-is-amazing-lgbtq-youths-number-one-advocate/

That's the New York Times promoting child grooming, by the way.

Not one Left-wing, Liberal Progressive denounced that. They support child endangerment, child grooming, and the gateway to legalizing pedophilia, as evident by the fact they voted a drag queen into office.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

Yes those were fallacies, that the point I’m making. It’s dumb to use some publications as proof positive of an endorsement of pedos.
Trump fucking endorsed Roy Moore, but The NY Times having an article about kids about kids who are self described drag queens is endorsing pedophilia?

Face it dude, it’s a dumb argument you’re making. Pedophiles are practically universally despised. End of story.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

Trump fucking endorsed Roy Moore

And? Was Roy Moore convicted? Trial by public opinion means zilch.

Find a rap sheet before casting stones at ghosts.

The NY Times having an article about kids about kids who are self described drag queens is endorsing pedophilia?

When the kid is performing provocative dances and stripping in front of adults, it is.

Face it dude, it’s a dumb argument you’re making.

Not when the evidence says otherwise.

I didn't write those articles. I didn't endorse child drag queen culture. I didn't vote a drag queen into office. All of those things are supported by Democrats.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

Alright I’m done arguing with an idiot. As it’s been said, you’ll drag be down to you’re level and beat me with experience. You keep taking small examples that aren’t examples of endorsements of pedos and say it counts an endorsement for pedophilia, but when I provided a ton of pedophiles on the right, they don’t count. They’re different. They aren’t repsentstive of the rampant pedos on the right. Anthony Bouchard impregnated a 14 year old and he’s about to primary Liz Cheney. And some how the left endorses pedos to you having articles about boys dressing up as girls, which is what most adult drag performers and trans people said they already did when they were kids.

Ps. Don’t pull that conservative victims bullshit cause I called you an idiot when you basically said I and others on the left endorse pedophilia.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

You keep taking small examples that aren’t examples of endorsements of pedos and say it counts an endorsement for pedophilia

Voting in a drag queen is not a small example, it's indicative of the point I made about the Left, Democrats, and Liberal Progressives promoting child grooming culture. That's exactly what child drag culture is.

but when I provided a ton of pedophiles on the right, they don’t count. They’re different. They aren’t repsentstive of the rampant pedos on the right.

I said they're false equivalences. You named people busted for committing crimes. I showed you PUBLIC articles ENDORSING a culture that grooms children. Those are two completely different things.

Committing heinous crimes =/= publicly endorsing child grooming.

Do you get it now?

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

“Voting in a drag queen is not a small example, it's indicative of the point I made about the Left, Democrats, and Liberal Progressives promoting child grooming culture. That's exactly what child drag culture is.”

That’s not an example of pedophilia. The drag politician if asked I’m sure will say that minors shouldn’t be having sex with adults. If the drag politician has sex with a child, and said other people, drag queens or not should have sex with children, then that politician was re-elected that’d be an endorsement.

Earlier I talked about child beauty pageant in general and I called it disturbing. Those sexualize children. And I said that people on both sides of the political aisle you’ll find for and against them.

https://www.cnn.com/2013/09/19/living/parents-ban-child-beauty-pageants/index.html

CNN is the left, if I recall. Just because a publication leans a certain way it is not indicative of the way the majority of voters feel.

If I find a Daily Stormer op Ed article endorsing a white ethnostate and ethnic cleansing that is not indicative of how all the right feel, now is it?

It doesn’t even have to be an op Ed, (cause you had a mix bag of op Ed vs profile pieces) lets just say it’s an profile on how a kid is a self proclaimed Nazi, like how these kids are self proclaimed drag queens.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/11/23/a-self-proclaimed-nazi-is-banned-from-his-college-campus-in-florida-but-allowed-to-remain-a-student/

“Omg the left is promoting children to be Nazis”

That’s the stupidity of your argument

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

Except you'll find a bunch of people on the Right denouncing Nazis:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-leader-mccarthy-slams-google-over-nazism-error-claims-bias-against-conservatives

As I said, where's an example of the Left denouncing child drag queens (which is child grooming)? Or child transgenderism? Or child grooming in general? They seem to endorse a lot of the stuff like Cuties on Netflix (calling the opposition Right-wing Nazis).
https://hubpages.com/entertainment/forum/349588/is-the-netflix-film--cuties--the-target-of-right-wing-nut-jobs--

https://billwhittle.com/progressives-defend-netflix-cuties-attack-conservatives-disgusted-by-sexualizing-preteen-girls/

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

We’re keep going back and forth moving the goal posts. You have nothing endorsing pedophilia that is indicative of how the majority of liberals feel which was my original argument

Not even the articles you from Deborah Soh or Tim Dickerson advocate for sex with children. They advocate for recognizing it as a sexual orientation, that shouldn’t be acted on. And those are not representative of how most democrats feel. And that’s a fringe belief. You have no data to support that they advocate for sex with children.
Your two articles, to my 100 examples of republicans who did it. Therefore, tacit endorsements.

Child drag ==/== not sex with children.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

We’re keep going back and forth moving the goal posts.

No, I held firm that the Left has promoted pedophilia (I linked some articles), and that they either endorse or encourage child grooming (the articles about child drag culture and grooming content like Cuties that they endorsed is further proof of that).

You named a bunch of Republicans busted for committing crimes. But you could neither show proof of the Left denouncing child grooming, nor Republicans that endorsed child grooming.

Not even the articles you from Deborah Soh or Tim Dickerson advocate for sex with children.

Didn't say they did.

They advocate for recognizing it as a sexual orientation, that shouldn’t be acted on. And those are not representative of how most democrats feel.

Any stats to back that up? I haven't encountered one Dem who has denounced child grooming.

Child drag ==/== not sex with children.

Child drag = child grooming. As I said, Dems support child grooming, which is a gateway to pedophilia.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

Oh suddenly you want stats? When you can provide any yourself. Go fuck yourself

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

I provided articles. You can't even do that.

There isn't ONE article from a prominent Left-wing outlet denouncing any of that degeneracy.

Yet you still defend Liberal Progressivism like your life depended on it.

That never once made you stop and think?

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

Republican election board official Kevin Coan was sentenced to two years probation for soliciting sex over the internet from a 14-year old girl.

Republican politician Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy.
Republican politician Keith Westmoreland was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children).
Republican anti-abortion activist John Allen Burt was charged with sexual misconduct involving a 15-year old girl.
Republican County Councilman Keola Childs pleaded guilty to molesting a male child.
Republican activist John Butler was charged with criminal sexual assault on a teenage girl.
Republican candidate Richard Gardner admitted to molesting his two daughters.
Republican Councilman and former Marine Jack W. Gardner was convicted of

reply

[–] NitroHangover (1143) 4 years ago

It kinda does. For 25 years, at LEAST, the idea of gay marriage was fought in the popular culture. NOBODY was in favor of it, including Barack Obama in his first term, and half of his second. And over and over and over again, we were told that it wasn't a "slippery slope." We were reminded that gay people were just adult people living normal lives in victimless adult relationships. We were assured that once gay and lesbian adults were allowed to get married that wouldn't lead to any other degeneracy that detracted from the nuclear family. ESPECIALLY degeneracy involving children. The goalposts would NOT be moved, and it was ridiculous to even think that they might be.

Now we've all embraced gay marriage, and it's legal, and the goalposts have IMMEDIATELY been moved, and now it almost EXCLUSIVELY involves children.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

"We were assured that once gay and lesbian adults were allowed to get married that wouldn't lead to any other degeneracy that detracted from the nuclear family."

Being gay isn't degeneracy. That snippet alone disqualifies your entire opinion. Not to mention the logical fallacy your argument is. Gay marriage is legal, therefore responsible for trans issues is the definition of jumping to conclusions/leap in logic.

reply

[–] NitroHangover (1143) 4 years ago

Being gay isn't degeneracy.

A bad choice of words, maybe. My understanding of the word was just a deviation from what is (or once was) considered normal and desirable. I didn't mean it as a moral condemnation of homosexuality. Based on having reviewed the definition of the word, I understand that it could be interpreted that way.

That snippet alone disqualifies your entire opinion.

Pffffff, no it doesn't. That's just your emotional reaction based on your interpretation of the meaning behind my use of the word degeneracy, including all the things you instinctively "read between the lines."

Not to mention the logical fallacy your argument is. Gay marriage is legal, therefore responsible for trans issues is the definition of jumping to conclusions/leap in logic.

That isn't a leap in logic. This isn't one random thing that happened, followed randomly by another random thing, that I'm trying to connect. The LBGT movement is an activist movement with immense influence and power. They worked for decades achieving the goal of widespread acceptance of homosexuality and legal gay marriage. And as soon as they achieved this goal, they immediately began working to achieve their next goal, which is widespread acceptance and normalization of transgenderism, even in children. The two are entirely connected.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

A bad choice of words, maybe.

No, you're absolutely right. It is degeneracy; it's abnormality; deviant behavior.

If consenting adults want to engage in homosexual acts, they can. It's their choice. But normalizing a fetish IS degenerate.

Gays and bisexual men can have up to ten times as many partners as straight men:
https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/article_files/4315111.pdf

They also contribute to 67% of all STD cases in America:
https://archive.is/b1kAx

They have higher rates of substance abuse:
https://archive.is/rXYPi
https://archive.is/o/jOkKf/https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9780387288710

And higher rates of domestic abuse:
https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218140612/http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/hosb0110.pdf

Nothing about their lifestyle contributes to a wholesome or functional society. Again, if someone wants to be gay, they can, but trying to apologize for it is is wrong, and trying to condone it as "normal" behavior is also misguided. It's how we ended up in the child trans debate in the first place.

They're boiling the frog.

reply

[–] Wuchak (8834) 4 years ago

Well said, Cyg.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

"Nothing about their lifestyle contributes to a wholesome or functional society. Again, if someone wants to be gay, they can, but trying to apologize for it is is wrong, and trying to condone it as "normal" behavior is also misguided. It's how we ended up in the child trans debate in the first place."

Speaking of misguided....

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

Please explain how a society promoting child grooming, child transgenderism, and child drag queens isn't misguided?

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

None of that has anything to do with being gay. That's a false equivalence, you kook. Deviant behavior, LOL. How do people like you still exist? Deviant, who talks like that? HAHA!

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

Words. They have meanings.

Deviant definition: departing from usual or accepted standards, especially in social or sexual behavior.

Gays and lesbians only account for 1.6% of the U.S., population, according to the CDC:
https://archive.is/AtuDc

Statistically speaking they are NOT the norm. They go against the basic principles of Natural Selection, since they can't procreate with each other, and their demographic numbers signify they are a fringe minority.

If they just kept to themselves that would be one thing, but the constant promotion for "representation" is a serious problem when they have startling rates of domestic abuse, double the rates within lesbian households than heterosexual couples, per capita:
https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218140612/http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/hosb0110.pdf

They also have a lot of strong drug and substance abuse within gay and lesbian communities:
https://archive.is/rXYPi

They also make up for nearly two-thirds of the sexually transmitted disease rates in America:
https://archive.is/lQNLA
https://archive.is/b1kAx

Promoting gay acceptance and gay marriage was a gateway policy for the child trans issues we face today. That never would have been possible had gay marriage not been brunt-force legalized by the supreme court, even though the general public was against it in every single proposal put to vote.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

"Promoting gay acceptance and gay marriage was a gateway policy for the child trans issues we face today. That never would have been possible had gay marriage not been brunt-force legalized by the supreme court, even though the general public was against it in every single proposal put to vote."

Literally a logical fallacy. Possibly even two.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

You're not actually arguing a stance, though.

Literally a logical fallacy. Possibly even two.

No, it's a fact:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/n-c-vote-ban-gay-marriage-warning-obama-060012987.html

That was all across the country. That's precisely why it went to the courts, which then forced gay marriage acceptance into civic institutions in 2015:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jun/26/gay-marriage-legal-supreme-court

This paved the way for Democrats to start introducing legislation for protecting the process of child transgenderism:
https://news.parhlo.com/cii-parents-punished-abandon-trans-children/

Thankfully, some Republicans are fighting back after parents made it known they don't want government mandating the child-trans agenda.

Lo and behold the Left-wing media are attacking Republicans for introducing anti-child trans legislation:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/04/09/opinion/republican-anti-trans-legislation-is-an-assault-children/

From big name outlets, too:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/30/trans-kids-rights-republican-state-bills-healthcare-sports

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/republicans-bills-transgender-youth_n_60654605c5b6adf599ccde94

There is no fallacy. Just facts. The facts are irrefutable. Irrefutable facts are the truth.

Now that gay marriage has passed, the Left is insistent on protecting the child trans agenda.

reply

[–] Lord Rake (4498) 4 years ago

In the context of the nuclear family he used the term correctly.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

I don't think you know what nuclear family actually means:

Definition of nuclear family

: a family group that consists only of parents and children

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nuclear%20family

https://www.yourdictionary.com/nuclear-family
https://www.britannica.com/topic/nuclear-family
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/nuclear-family

reply

[–] Lord Rake (4498) 4 years ago

Nope that is what I thought it meant, traditional nuclear family mother and father with kids. Degenerating from that would be two mothers and kids, two fathers and kids. Not saying gay people are bad parents, but nature determined the ideal circumstance for human pairing and child raising a long time ago. Children need to learn some things from their mother and some things from their father.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

Can you not read?

" a family group that consists only of parents and children"

reply

[–] Lord Rake (4498) 4 years ago

I can read and I can also get my hands on things known as books, which might be ten years old, and I can read the definition from those books about nuclear family and parents. Some define parents as ones mother and father in those books.

reply

[–] Bloodworth79 (5695) 4 years ago

Dont worry they are choosing a lifestyle where they cannot reproduce.

Their Genes and dna will never be passed on into the future.
Family lineage stops with them

The joke is on them

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

And yet straight people will continue to produce both homosexual and transsexual offspring.

Perhaps you need to rethink your logic, lest the joke be on you, dumbass.

reply

[–] Bloodworth79 (5695) 4 years ago

No actually the gay population is dwindling.
That is why they are recruiting like mad
Trying to tell kids they have a choice in the matter...
Straight people may reproduce them. But that lifestyle choice cannot produce offspring. so that persons Genes and many times the family last name is forever erased In history.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

What evidence do you have that the gay population is dwindling? Do you seriously think there are less gay people in the world than 50 years ago? I would argue that the percentage is almost exactly the same and given that the worldwide population has increased, so has the amount of gay people. The only difference would be the amount of openly gay people has definitely increased, as gay people are less inclined to keep their sexuality a secret in fear of negative reaction from bigots like you.

I know there’s not much point debating the matter with someone who believes homosexuality is a choice, that a person would actively choose to be bullied, ridiculed and discriminated against. That said, your argument about family lineage being deleted is pure hogwash. That would only be a possibility in one child families, but in the majority of families where there are multiple children it would be extremely unlikely that all the siblings are gay, and therefore one person’s sexuality is hardly a threat to the family name continuing. Certainly no more a threat than couples who only have daughters, are you going to start ragging on them too?

Admit it, the only reason you come up with these baseless, uninformed opinions is to justify your own personal distaste for homosexuals. If a gay guy can be man enough to come out in a hostile environment, perhaps you can be man enough to admit your own prejudice.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

It is a choice. Even the Left admit it's a choice:
https://www.womenshealthmag.com/sex-and-love/a36547903/how-to-explore-sexuality/

But scientifically speaking, you can't be born gay. It's literally physiologically impossible. The hypothalamus that produces the hormonal secretion necessary for sexual attraction has less than 20% of its cells developed in the perinatal and neonatal process:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7643957/

The gonadotropin that the pituitary glands secrete that create the neurotransmitters to make it possible to perceive sexuality don't naturally occur until puberty:
https://www.news-medical.net/health/Gonadotrophin-Hormones.aspx

They only secrete early due to trauma, abuse, or promiscuity.

You can't also perceive sexuality until your limbic system develops so you can actually become cognizant of environmental stimuli, which is also a postnatal development. How cognitive development works is explained here:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/296669291_Executive_Function#pf5

So yes, it is in a way a choice. Since you can't be attracted to something without your senses, and your senses aren't fully developed enough to perceive such stimuli in the prenatal phase because the organs that allow that process to exist aren't developed enough for the endocrine systems to secrete the necessary hormones.

Ergo, it's physiologically impossible to be born gay.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

So less than 20% is not zero, that’s inconclusive

Your other points talk about developmental factors, but those factors are determined at a genetic level.

There’s no single gay gene, there’s multiple genes that affect sexuality according to the largest study on the subject.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/365/6456/eaat7693

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

So less than 20% is not zero, that’s inconclusive

You misunderstand, you need the limbic system to feed stimuli to the gonads, which at that point aren't fully functioning in a prenatal state. The hypothalamus is less than 20% of functionality which does NOT include enough gonadotropin beyond basic gonad distinction. Once the testes and ovaries are initially formed, no more gonadotropin is secreted; without gonadotropin you have ZERO neurotransmitters sending signals for sexual attraction, meaning you CANNOT be born gay because you aren't receiving ANY neurotransmitters because your limbic system isn't developed to perceived environmental stimuli at that state.

There is no inconclusive to it, your organs simply DO NOT exist at that stage to enable sexual attraction. A simple exercise would be to explain something you find attractive without using any of your five senses (since those aren't fully developed in a perinatal/prenatal state). Go ahead and try. I'll wait until the twelfth of never for your explanation.

There’s no single gay gene, there’s multiple genes that affect sexuality according to the largest study on the subject.

There are NO gay genes at all. ZERO. ZIP. NILCHE.

Any genetic factors they observe are from epigenetics, which occurs AFTER gene expression has been stimulated by the environment. The study even reveals as much in the abstract, which reads "They find multiple loci implicated in same-sex sexual behavior indicating that, like other behavioral traits, nonheterosexual behavior is polygenic."

Do you understand what polygenic means? In relation to epigenics it means that the gene expression has ALREADY been altered, meaning they're observing phenotypes AFTER gays have already settled into the lifestyle.

It's why there are ZERO studies pointing to the supposed gay genes in prenatal allele strands. Where are they? If you're born gay those strands must exist.

reply

[–] asom (6880) 4 years ago

Can you read? or understand what he said? He didn't say anything about less homosexual or whatever people in the world, he said their DNA and genes will never be passed into the future and the family lineage ends with them ...

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Can you?

“No actually the gay population is dwindling.”

reply

[–] asom (6880) 4 years ago

Not in the comment you were commenting on.

"Dont worry they are choosing a lifestyle where they cannot reproduce.

Their Genes and dna will never be passed on into the future.
Family lineage stops with them

The joke is on them"

He might have said that in the next comment because you led him into it :P

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

I addressed that point too, but thank you for your contribution.

reply

[–] ccr1633 (1531) 4 years ago

"And yet straight people will continue to produce both homosexual and transsexual offspring."

Sure, to the tune of maybe 1% of their offspring. Compare that 99% to 0%. I could see you as an army of one fighting a regiment, and after a bullet rips through your chest you bellow with your last breath "Yeah, but I killed one of you too!"

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

That seems like an unnecessarily violent analogy, and doesn’t really counter my point that gay/transgender numbers won’t decrease just because they might not reproduce themselves.

Funny to me that some straight people hold a lot of anger towards gays but none towards themselves for creating them in the first place!

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

Funny to me that some straight people hold a lot of anger towards gays but none towards themselves for creating them in the first place!

It's because gays can't procreate so they indoctrinate.

It's one thing to engage in a lifestyle choice, it's another thing to foist it upon everyone else, including children.

The child grooming by the Rainbow Reich is quite disturbing, but it's because it's the only way they can increase their numbers, through inculcation.

reply

[–] ChoovieMatt (148) 4 years ago

You talk overwhelming amounts of shit.

I doubt you've ever even met a gay person, let alone asked them about this.

There's not a single one I've ever encountered who has said they were 'influenced' into being gay, a theory which is further undone by the fact that most gay adults' childhoods will pre-date seeing ANY gay content on TV, so how were any of them indoctrinated?

Feel free to try your 'they were molested'/'recruited' comeback with all of its mathematical impossibilities. No recruitment drives (how would that even work?), no creepy older people seducing them. Stories of self-discovery are uniformal and consistent throughout the world.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

most gay adults' childhoods will pre-date seeing ANY gay content on TV, so how were any of them indoctrinated?

Catholic priests. Child groomers. Child predators. Childhood abuse. Relatives who are molesters, etc., etc., etc. Take your pick.

Feel free to try your 'they were molested'/'recruited' comeback with all of its mathematical impossibilities

There is no impossibility, it's a scientific fact that majority of people who associate with the LGBTQIA+ community have been sexually abused as kids:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11501300/

Here's another study that reveals the same thing:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9127231/

There are many more studies saying the same thing.

That's not to say EVERY gay person was molested/abused as a child, but a large percentage of them are.

Stories of self-discovery are uniformal and consistent throughout the world.

Not if the people lie about their childhood. A lot of them hide their abuse due to shame:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19457556/

And a lot of times this results in higher consumption of substance abuse:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/development-and-psychopathology/article/abs/substance-use-to-regulate-intense-posttraumatic-shame-in-individuals-with-childhood-abuse-and-neglect/C870677EA5F70C73197F5F108E0B6F67

This is indicative of lots of those in the LGBTQIA+ community being chronic substance abusers, and having higher rates of substance abuse per capita than heterosexuals:
https://archive.is/rXYPi
https://archive.is/lQNLA

reply

[–] ChoovieMatt (148) 4 years ago

"Catholic priests. Child groomers. Child predators. Childhood abuse. Relatives who are molesters, etc., etc., etc. Take your pick."

OK, so how many of the above must there be running around to 'indoctrinate' all gay people across the globe? Additionally, how about the children abused who DON'T turn out to be gay? Given that most abusers are men preying on girls you're suggesting ridiculous numbers of people are doing this. It doesn't add up.

"Not if the people lie about their childhood."

Yeah no. Gay folks are HUGELY vocal about their growing up experience because it's the first thing they're ever asked by strangers: "When did you realize?" Key word that - REALIZE.

All of this just compounds the fact that you've never even *spoken* with one of the people of whom you claim to be such an expert in the lives of, and no number of confirmation-bias studies you found online is going to compensate for that oversight.

Try again.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

Given that most abusers are men preying on girls you're suggesting ridiculous numbers of people are doing this. It doesn't add up.

That's actually how a lot of women turn to lesbianism. In fact, they don't even really turn into lesbians, they just shun ALL men. A third of lesbians, for instance, DON'T even have sex. So they're not really lesbians, they just don't like men and don't like intimacy:
https://micheleomara.com/often-lesbian-couples-sex/

Yeah no. Gay folks are HUGELY vocal about their growing up experience because it's the first thing they're ever asked by strangers: "When did you realize?" Key word that - REALIZE.

No one asks them that. They have to TELL them that. There is no such thing as someone being able to SEE your sexual orientation. People have to be INFORMED about it.

All of this just compounds the fact that you've never even *spoken* with one of the people of whom you claim to be such an expert in the lives of, and no number of confirmation-bias studies you found online is going to compensate for that oversight.

It's not confirmation bias. It's science. It's fact. It's the truth.

reply

[–] ChoovieMatt (148) 4 years ago

It is pure confirmation bias - even the most cursory of internet searches brings up various counter studies.

"No one asks them that. They have to TELL them that. There is no such thing as someone being able to SEE your sexual orientation. People have to be INFORMED about it."

Again, you're further underlining the fact you've not been around any gay people.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

It is pure confirmation bias - even the most cursory of internet searches brings up various counter studies.

Unscientific, non-peer reviewed, Left-wing agitprop aren't facts, they're just opinions not based in real, verifiable science.

reply

[–] ChoovieMatt (148) 4 years ago

Yeah yeah everyone else is wrong but right-wing points of view etc... Heard it all before.

You're just regurgitating other people's work as fact, you cant verify it yourself because it's clear you've not mixed with anybody gay, so you have no credibility.

You say gay people 'contribute nothing', but maybe take a good long look in the mirror and ask what the hell it is you're doing.

reply

[–] ChoovieMatt (148) 4 years ago

I forgot to include this observation previously:

"There is no impossibility, it's a scientific fact that majority of people who associate with the LGBTQIA+ community have been sexually abused as kids:"

So, according to your theory, most gay people were victims of abuse who will later go on to form substance abuse issues, live in shame, etc.

Please answer for me then, by you coming on here and calling them disgusting, saying they don't contribute etc., generally adding further abuse and shame to their psyche than that they have, according to *you*, already been victims of...

How are you any better than another abuser?

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

How are you any better than another abuser?

I haven't said that to any gay person.

I personally believe they need a lot of psychiatric and mental wellness assistance.

In fact, gays suffer the most depression, shame and substance abuse living IN gay communities:
https://archive.is/jCqVP

https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/gay-loneliness/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23171872_GPs_understanding_of_how_depression_affects_gay_and_HIV_positive_men

You probably didn't know that did you? So this whole thing of "straights are bullying gays into substance abuse" is just a red herring. The communities are rife with mental illness issues, implicating some serious emotional and psychological imbalances formed from their life experiences.

In this case... I'm the good guy.

reply

[–] ChoovieMatt (148) 4 years ago

You're absolutely deluded if you think you're helping the situation with the things you post.

Starting threads about how 'disgusting' it is that there's a gay character in a film is not the action of a good person. You don't react to homophobic comments made by other posters preaching your 'good intentions' either, you just pour fuel on the fire.

You can continue to lie to yourself and others, but you know exactly what you're doing.

reply

[–] Kowalski (76824) 4 years ago

They deserve to work a job, get health insurance, and everything else the rest of us are entitled too as citizens of our respective countries

AS LONG AS THEY FOLLOW YOUR ACCEPTABLE GUIDELINES...WOULDN'Y WANT TO ANGER YOUR PIMPLEY ASS.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

Yes, like not beat up or cheat women out of spots women only deserve - like in sports. That's not an unreasonable opinion. People like Fallon Fox are dirtbags and I don't care if that bothers you.

reply

[–] Kowalski (76824) 4 years ago

LMAO...THAT WHOLE SHITTY POST OF YOURS BOILED DOWN TO FALLON FOX,SO YOU CAN WIN?...YOURE AN IDIOT.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

I did say people like Fallon Fox....

Why are you like this, Kowalski? You're legitimately brain damaged or handicapped or something. Your comprehension is pure shit, you rarely put together a coherent statement, and argue with everyone here. You're also on the side of men beating up women and scoff at ME. *forehead slap* Seriously, what is wrong with you?

reply

[–] Kowalski (76824) 4 years ago

YOU ARE CLEARLY INTOLERANT OF ANYONE NOT LIKE YOU...YOUR HUGE RAMBLING POST ABOUT HOW YOU ARENT A TRANPHOBE THAT READS LIKE THE SIDE OF THE MOUTH TALK OF A RAMBLING TRANSPHOBE...YOU SEEM TO BE A BAD EGG.🙂

reply

[–] chilone (18041) 4 years ago

I don't see that at all.

reply

[–] Kowalski (76824) 4 years ago

WONDER WHY?🙂

reply

[–] chilone (18041) 4 years ago

Because I don't spend my every waking moment stoned.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

"YOU ARE CLEARLY INTOLERANT OF ANYONE NOT LIKE YOU..."

That's a logical fallacy, bud.

https://walton.uark.edu/business-communication-lab/Resources/downloads/Logical_Fallacies.pdf
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Jumping-to-Conclusions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faulty_generalization

reply

[–] asom (6880) 4 years ago

I don't think you know what being tolerant means ...

reply

[–] Kowalski (76824) 4 years ago

LMAO...HOW ARE YOU POT?

reply

[–] asom (6880) 4 years ago

Always better than you :D

As I said, you have no idea what tolerant means, and your posts show it ;)

Every single TIME!

reply

[–] Kowalski (76824) 4 years ago

LMAO...YOU'RE ONE OF THE WORST PEPLE HERE..WHY WOULD I CARE WHAT YOU SAY?🤔

reply

[–] asom (6880) 4 years ago

And YOU still keep replying ;)

reply

[–] Kowalski (76824) 4 years ago

I DO...WHY CAN'T I GET OVER YOU?!🍆💛

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

"LMAO...YOU'RE ONE OF THE WORST PEPLE HERE..."

Boy, there's some irony.

reply

[–] SickSpazmoid (846) 4 years ago

Why is this weirdo again on the frontpage? Did the Americans just wake up? Now it is the time of Elliot, Trump, Biden and bunch of superheroes.

It is about time somebody to cut off the undersea cables.

reply

[–] asom (6880) 4 years ago

It's about control and nothing more.

Changing the culture, by force.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 4 years ago

Exactly this.

They're already laying the groundwork for future generations by specifically targeting the kids, normalizing child trans propaganda and homosexual culture within kid's media.

The next generation will think it's okay to grow up mutilating themselves, hocking babies up on hormonal pills, and engaging in all sorts of unspeakable acts.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

It’s because conservatives have little to no empathy for people who aren’t exactly like them and you blindly calling others mentally ill and adds to the stigma.

Transsexualism has been is no longer a disease according to the WHO and the DSM5

“The WHO said it moved the newly renamed “gender incongruence” to its list of “sexual health conditions" because "while evidence is now clear that it is not a mental disorder, and indeed classifying it in this can cause enormous stigma for people who are transgender, there remain significant health care needs that can best be met if the condition is coded under the ICD.”

The DSM5 uses gender dysphoria which a trans person can have, but a psychological diagnoses can be change when a trans person finally assumes the gender they feel they were supposed to be.

The right loves to use scare tactics about trans people and sexual assault in bathrooms and pedophilia also further stigmatizing trans people, but the logic doesn’t hold water at all. Sexual assault for adults and children alike is usually done by someone the victim knows.
They also don’t use their logic they use to oppose gun control. “Criminals don’t follow laws anyway” so a rapist or a child molester isnt going to let some bathroom bill stop them. Also it ignores the commonality of same sex pedophilia and the fact that a male child molester can just as easy go into a bathroom and molest a boy.

You describe them as mentally ill because “they hate themselves so much they cut up their body to please their delusion. Do you say that about people who have tattoos, piecings or military members who get branded of the branch they serve in? Trans people take hormones, but so do body builders, do you consider them mentally ill?

In the end, I don’t know what it feels like to feel I was born the wrong gender. I never will, but I’m sympathetic to what it feels like to be judged,disrespected and dehumanized. Dehumanizing “the other” has lead to every genocide.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

Why the hell would I know who the fuck those people are? However, I do know the lengths of surgery and hormone replacement some choose to go through and some do not, but it’s not much different than the Kardashians plumping their asses and lips. Or those people that mod themselves with tattooed piercings and shit to make themselves look like lizards, tigers and other animals.

The articles you provided only proves my point about the “criminals will be criminals” logic.

Listen, people are people just let them do what they want to be happy as long as it doesn’t hurt anybody else. And this was the crux of your last paragraph. But you say you’re not transphobic but you spend your time trashing them, saying they hate themselves and calling them crazy. (Which by the way was one thing you didn’t even try to retort because you’re just factually incorrect). People want all sorts of weird shit in life. There was some study on the things people have down they said made them truly happier. Plastic surgery was one of the top two things.

In terms of the sports thing, I know title 9 allows girls to join male sports teams and Vice versa. There’s coed sports of all sorts too. There’s middle ground there somewhere. Ronda Rousey’s dumbass was shittalking Floyd Mayweather up until Holly Hunter beat the shit out of her. But if she wanted to size up against Logan Paul or Conor McGregor I say let em

If my name was Peter and someone called me Petey and I asked them not to, I prefer Peter and they did repeatedly, that person would be an asshole. You’re calling Elliot Page not a real man, I understand the sentiment, but just say she’s not biologically born a man and people won’t call you an transphobic. Trans people do not deny they were born biologically a man or a woman, they just say they don’t think weren’t born the gender they were supposed to.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

Whose conservative or "the right"? I'm an Independent and voted for Biden. In fact, I have NEVER voted for a Republican President.

She chopped off her tits, takes hormones, and if she had "bottom surgery" she has a fake penis that gets erect by pumping it up - and you are trying to tell me she's NOT mentally ill?

I am VERY aware of what the WHO has said. There is absolutely NOTHING scientific or data-driven in their statement:

"So in order to reduce the stigma, while also ensuring access to necessary health interventions, this was placed in a different chapter."

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-48448804

It's all political and an attempt to reduce trans suicides and attacks. There is no science here.

"You describe them as mentally ill because “they hate themselves so much they cut up their body to please their delusion. Do you say that about people who have tattoos, piecings or military members who get branded of the branch they serve in? Trans people take hormones, but so do body builders, do you consider them mentally ill?"

I literally did in my OP:

"It's no different than someone obsessed with plastic surgery (not just gets it, but can't stop), people OBSESSED with fitness (not just people who exercise), or someone who wants to chop a limb off: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3326051/. We do not condone any of these things.

"In the end, I don’t know what it feels like to feel I was born the wrong gender. I never will, but I’m sympathetic to what it feels like to be judged,disrespected and dehumanized. Dehumanizing “the other” has lead to every genocide."

But you know it's a feeling...

I literally condemned discrimination and violence against them in my OP.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

First, I never said you were on the right.

Second, we do condone people getting tattoos in excess. We do condone bodybuilder taking steroids and modifying their bodies excessively, we do condone Kardashians fattening their asses, in fact we reward them. There’s rich rappers and rock stars covered head to to making millions, bodybuilders have contests, Kardashians are rich and loved by millions disillusioned girls in this country.

"In the end, I don’t know what it feels like to feel I was born the wrong gender. I never will, but I’m sympathetic to what it feels like to be judged,disrespected and dehumanized. Dehumanizing “the other” has lead to every genocide."

But you know it's a feeling...“

It starts as a feeling for the victims, but then sometimes the victims suffer ptsd and kill themselves and it doesn’t always end in a just being a feeling. The perpetrators of the bullying, start with words calling them “it” and “things”, then sometimes it escalates to actions like violence. When a person becomes a thing, people become easier to commit acts of violence. Jews, Tutsi’s were all consider less than human by their killers, they were “cock roaches that needed to exterminated”

I know you condemned violence but my point is language matters. I’m not going say language is violence like some crazy leftist, but I’m saying it starts with language, and gets easier to get worse from there.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

Victims, you say? Of what? Their feelings of discomfort? Sounds almost like.....mental illness.

You replied to MY post. You addressed ME.And in responding to something I said, you started ranting about the right. There are many not on the right who do not support this insanity. JK Rowling has gotten massive amounts of shit for essentially saying what I said in my OP. She's called a TERF. Tons of feminists - who are usually very liberal - are against this stuff.

Dude, there's countless studies about self-destructive behavior like EXTREME body modifications, exercise, etc. This isn't even about excessive tattooing, but tatoos in general!

"A new study has discovered that people with tattoos were more likely to be diagnosed with mental health issues and to report sleep problems.'

https://psychcentral.com/news/2019/01/27/people-with-tattoos-more-likely-to-also-have-mental-health-issues#1

"Many psychiatric residents will encounter patients who modify their bodies. Body modification (e.g., tattooing, non-earlobe piercing) can incite many reactions in the observer and can often be a source of stereotyping. An oft-repeated mantra is that possession of significant body modifications (≥1 tattoo or multiple non-earlobe piercings) is suggestive of the presence of a personality disorder in the bearer (1–3). "

https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2017.120803

"Signs That Body Modification May Be Becoming an Addiction"

https://fherehab.com/learning/signs-of-body-modification-addiction/

"Bodybuilding addiction may be related to body dysmorphia and can be a serious problem. If you or someone you care about is into strength training, look for the signs that you may have crossed the line into an unhealthy obsession"

https://www.promisesbehavioralhealth.com/addiction-recovery-blog/are-you-addicted-to-bodybuilding/

"Comparison of the Narcissism Level of the Bodybuilders before and after the Application of Anabolic Steroid Cure"

https://www.hrpub.org/downlo

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

"Understanding Plastic Surgery Addiction

Plastic surgery addiction is a behavioral disorder which causes a person to want to constantly change their appearance by undergoing plastic surgery. This disorder may cause someone to spend thousands of dollars on multiple operations, all of which may not ultimately make them any happier. The desire for plastic surgery often arises from the insecurity that people feel about how they look. This is a normal emotion that everybody occasionally experiences. However, when insecurity becomes obsessive and plastic surgery becomes the center of a person’s life, there is a serious problem."

https://www.addictioncenter.com/drugs/plastic-surgery-addiction/

I highly doubt this stuff is a surprise to you. This is relatively common knowledge/sense type stuff.

But say a trans person has mental health issues? Oh no, can't do that. Give me a break.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

How bout victims of harassment, physical violence, sexual assault?
21% of TGQN (transgender, genderqueer, nonconforming) college students have been sexually assaulted, compared to 18% of non-TGQN females, and 4% of non-TGQN males.
In a 2015 survey of 27,715 respondents of transgendered people:
Nearly half (46%) of respondents were verbally harassed in the past year because of being transgender.
Nearly one in ten (9%) respondents were physically attacked in the past year because of being transgender.
Nearly half (47%) of respondents were sexually assaulted at some point in their lifetime and one in ten (10%) were sexually assaulted in the past year. In communities of color, these numbers are higher: 53% of Black respondents were sexually assaulted in their lifetime and 13% were sexually assaulted in the last year.
72% of respondents who have done sex work, which usually involves trafficking, exploitation and intimidation 65% of respondents who have experienced homelessness, and 61% of respondents with disabilities reported being sexually assaulted in their lifetime.
More than half (54%) experienced some form of intimate partner violence, including acts involving coercive control and physical harm.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

"How bout victims of harassment, physical violence, sexual assault?"

Stop lying. You're talking about their mental state. You even mention PTSD:

"It starts as a feeling for the victims, but then sometimes the victims suffer ptsd and kill themselves and it doesn’t always end in a just being a feeling."

Victims of what? We're not talking about how they are treated, but their mindset/health here and you KNOW. IT. You got caught and are desperately trying to back track because your own words were used against you. You're just deflecting at this point.

Just like how you threw a tempter tantrum when someone else pointed out your crap logic:

"Fuck off I wasn’t talking to you, bitch."

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

You questioned what they are victims of? Obviously there’s mental health problems with depression and PTSD with all populations of people. They could suffer those unrelated to their transgenderism which we already discussed the DSM5 it’s not a mental illness like the other two.

Are gonna say their PTSD or depression can’t be related to the harassment and violence?
Or say that PTSD and depression is their fault because of their transgenderism?

Would you blame a rape victim or veteran for his ptsd or depression?

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

We were talking about simply BEING trans. Their feelings (your words) and mental state.

You: "In the end, I don’t know what it feels like to feel I was born the wrong gender. I never will, but I’m sympathetic to what it feels like to be judged,disrespected and dehumanized. Dehumanizing “the other” has lead to every genocide."

Me: But you know it's a feeling...

You: It starts as a feeling for the victims, but then sometimes the victims suffer ptsd and kill themselves and it doesn’t always end in a just being a feeling.

You know it's mental. When talking about their feelings, you called them victims. You've said it and got backed into a corner when your own words were used against you. Now you're deflecting. You're trying to do it again with this "Would you blame a rape victim?" "Are you saying trans people aren't subject to violence?" That's not what we were talking about and you are trying to shift gears (and you KNOW IT). Grow up.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

He called me a child, I responded in kind with a name. Whatever, care to address the only 12% of respondents who said transgender acceptance had gone too far by democrats. That’s a very small minority of Dems.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Just like how you threw a tempter tantrum when someone else pointed out your crap logic:

"Fuck off I wasn’t talking to you, bitch."

He's a misogynist PIECE OF GARBAGE, proving the point I made earlier about how both LGBT and trans ideology are rooted in misogyny, to further explain why progressives are pushing against this bullshit as much as conservatives. Right out of the gate, the asshole started using profanity ("fuck") and then calls me a "bitch." I didn't see him using profanity with anyone else are calling anyone else a bitch.

Gosh, I wonder why. 🙄

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 4 years ago

Yeah, this guy is a nutter. Deflection, angrily lashing out, he's a man-baby.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Kowalski (76824) 4 years ago

LMAO

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 4 years ago

Fuck off I wasn’t talking to you, bitch

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/11/08/transgender-issues-divide-republicans-and-democrats/ft_17-11-06_transgender_accepting/

Only 12% of democrats have said accepting of trans people has gone too far
60% say haven’t gone far enough. 27% say it’s been about right

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Another troll to put on ignore, and a typical pro trans MISOGYNIST to boot. I noticed you haven't been using profanity with other posters who've been disagreeing with you, misogynistic asshole. Oh, gosh--I wonder why...Hmmm...Is it because it's EXACTLY what I said before?

Bye, misogynistic asshole. I also deleted my responses to you because what I learned is that you just wasted my time. So, you go talk in circles to the other posters like the CHILD that you are. They're all presumable male, so you should be more than happy talking to them.

reply

[–] DarkHorse (297) 4 years ago

Progressives are all or nothing about everything. That is how they work.

reply

[–] sut6432 (2910) 4 years ago

They’re awful.

reply